First Paid Job, Related Questions

[KarinaB1970]

Hi Everyone,

I just did my first paid job. The gentleman that I did the job for is an international entertainer, a bubbleologist. This was a commercial job, not a "portrait" shoot by any means. The focus/star was the bubbles and his performance, not him specifically.

My biggest question is....how long would you expect 650 photos to take to post process for proofs. It took me an avg. of 2 min. per photo to open, enlarge, brighten (to see good bubble definition) and sharpen. Also, batch resizing and uploading to the web for viewing. Is this unreasonable?

I understand that many who do studio work such as portrait or glamour may not have this kind, if any, post processing necessary prior to sharing the proofs with the client. Working with bubbles was definitely a challenge with lighting (to make the bubble really stand out) and of course bubbles popping, not properly forming or being positioned correctly, etc.

Really looking for thoughts on post processing and proofs. While not one of the most difficult to shoot, here is one of the images I made on Monday of his new protege, Harry:

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52033865-M.jpg

Thanks for your input!

[KarinaB1970]

Since I am very shy about posting my proofs, here is one that was post processed. Actually, I would say it was a bit more...."retouched." His banner that was attached to the stage curtains was not the same color "black" as the curtain and some extra work had to be done there. This is "the man" in action. While there is guaranteed to be someone to point out that the bubble is over his eye...yes, this is true, and that was avoided as much as possible, but the focus of the shoot was really his bubbles...they were the star...and he was to be "performing." :D

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52036615-L.jpg

[symes]

That second one is awesome...I can't answer many of your questions but that is unreal...

my proofs for my one paid shoot were not processed at all...I waited until the family picked the photos they wanted and then I processed those images...if there were a few I thought the family missed out on then I went and I processed those pictures...

Cheers,

[KarinaB1970]

Here is a link to the images he currently has displayed on his website taken by other professional photographers, not by me (mine are not up yet, though will be replacing most of these):

http://www.bubblemania.com/amazing-photos/

I had to redo most of these to update his more mature, but still fun image :)

Here are some of mine:

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52068284-L.jpg

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52068280-L.jpg

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52068278-L.jpg

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52068268-L.jpg

http://Galleries.smugmug.com/photos/52068263-M.jpg

[PhotosGuy]

how long would you expect 650 photos to take to post process for proofs. It took me an avg. of 2 min. per photo to open, enlarge, brighten (to see good bubble definition) and sharpen. These are proofs, right? So shoot RAW. 2 minutes to adjust parameters on one shot. 1 minute to apply the changes to all 649 others. A few minutes to type the invoice. ;)
OK, if you change the lighting, it will take a few minutes longer, but you get the idea.

[KarinaB1970]

These are proofs, right? So shoot RAW. 2 minutes to adjust parameters on one shot. 1 minute to apply the changes to all 649 others. A few minutes to type the invoice. ;)
OK, if you change the lighting, it will take a few minutes longer, but you get the idea.

ARRGGHHH! Are you telling me it should have taken me 12 mintues and NOT 12 hours?!?! :cry:

I found this to be a kind of unique situation, but perhaps Im just niave.

Because you could not see the bubble detail in the original images, I opened each one... enlarged it and lightened it to see if it was a keeper, then made a couple of changes to make the bubble pop out if it was.

Could I have batch processed? Maybe. I didnt think it was really an option for two main reasons, one being the bubble detail issue and the other being that the lighting was constantly changing as he was constantly moving from one end of the room to the next, some wide angle shots, some close up, etc. I guess I could have saved some time by doing small batches...or at least batching the groups that required many more shots.

I would estimate that he did 40-50 different "stunts" which put him all over the place. Being a high energy guy trying to fit a lot in a little time, I was constantly moving with him trying to keep up with the lighting and all.

You wouldnt give your client the 650 shots to choose from and make him go through them all, would you? Perhaps you could with products, portraits, etc., but with bubbles, some shots dont even have bubbles in them (popped)...not sure I would want the client to be bothered with that. I got it down to 225 images that are of good quality, and I feel like maybe I should narrow it down some more!

Im sooo confused LOL I do appreciate your reply and any additional thoughts/comments you do provide :D

[snibbetsj]

This is the main reason I shoot RAW + small JPEG. If I work right and get good exposures, I don't have to any pp for proof. I just print out a (few hundred) 4x6s right from the camera. I don't necessarily print out ALL the shots, I do cull for bad exposure, missed focus, etc. The client picks the shots they want then I only have to work on the final prints. Saves a bunch of time (for me)

[goatee]

Otherwise, you go through the shots - and if it's not a keeper delete it, and if it is drag the exposure slider to it's approximately correct. Then using whatever software you have (assuming it has this function, and if not, get Raw Shooter Premium ASAP), select all the keeper shots, and tell your RAW processing software to generate proofs. This should cut the time down to around 10-20 seconds per image, then whilst it's generating the proofs, have a cup of tea, and THEN type up the invoice :)

[mbze430]

I don't do 4x6 proofs. Its a waste of money. proofs are what they are. For the clients to review them. 2.5x3.5 is what I usually show my clients. Or I direct them to our website for them to view. <-- The easiest way.

[goatee]

I don't do 4x6 proofs. Its a waste of money. proofs are what they are. For the clients to review them. 2.5x3.5 is what I usually show my clients. Or I direct them to our website for them to view. <-- The easiest way.

But you still have a workflow to get the proofs on your website. . . which is, what the OP is looking for, I think.

[nevilleb]

That is one good bubble maker! And, nice shots to boot!

nevilleb